From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qa0-x234.google.com (mail-qa0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 165D521F1ED for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 08:32:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qa0-f52.google.com with SMTP id j15so4535690qaq.11 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 08:32:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date :to:mime-version; bh=N/mh3uvMwUvzQ6k3FK6d9XfSRpY5war0FNvRSMQJug8=; b=oSscZQ28sGlgwTukjKCTak2hZ63iZ0dpkf4Rod7UEN/7xsI0w78fPqTMR1R4aHNq2F j3palygRKZmI7DbbDkNvuTdCJjTy1ksNI/NxcItakJr2cwkEkCrJkwoQ0mbbr5ppFUKs wHSWhYOFVSQXmo1e1jWrYPWx+aTdh5S/I71jy29CWPcTQZs0vV7kCFemukve36yxpT98 xAuhEl7y5HPhZxbwWBskScZ2U3m0FhDjiR01cQHdu3wkApqZkeNJ/AwApQlKL1qKT6La oE00BDBmTUgBmk4LcgWUsEt2Kzg9jytGisp0odX4KtoTYEy0+l3Y3J8GzMLh8lqVmbsw Yp+Q== X-Received: by 10.224.30.133 with SMTP id u5mr20041692qac.47.1389457921246; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 08:32:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from richs-mbp-2018.home.lan ([64.223.225.159]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id x8sm12110823qed.9.2014.01.11.08.32.00 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 11 Jan 2014 08:32:00 -0800 (PST) From: Rich Brown Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3BF82F93-07EC-44F8-AF98-2FD156A9A43F@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 11:31:59 -0500 To: cerowrt-devel Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Perfection vs. Good Enough X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:32:30 -0000 X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:32:30 -0000 Folks, I am so pleased with the state of CeroWrt. The software has improved = enormously, to the point that we all get really good performance from = our routers at home. If you want a real eyeful of the progress we=92ve = made, check list at the bottom of the Release Notes: = http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/CeroWrt_310_Release_Notes= CeroWrt is working great. We have two great testimonials for how it has = improved network performance (from Fred Stratton and David Personnette, = see = https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2014-January/001961.= html and = https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/2014-January/001970.= html) I have been using 3.10.24-8 at home without hiccups (after I turned on = SQM :-) since it was shipped. We=92ve got a really great program. But - I=92m afraid we=92re letting perfection be the enemy of the good. = Here are a couple indications: - The rest of the world doesn=92t know about this good work. If you look = at the front page of the site, we=92re recommending CeroWrt 3.7.5-2 from = last February. It has Codel, but not much more. Our understanding of the = world has expanded by an order of magnitude, but we=92re not making it = available to anyone. - The entire discussion of link layers has held us back. That=92s why I = proposed to cut back the choices to ATM and None, and let people figure = out the details if they want to/have time to optimize. - We have tons of updated modules (dnsmasq, IPv6, quagga, mosh) which we = should get out to the world.=20 - The entire product is much tighter, works better, and we can be proud = of it. As Dave T=E4ht pointed out in a recent note: > Compared to the orders of magnitude we already get from fq codel, the = sum benefit=20 > of these [Link Layer Adaptation] fixes is in the very small percentage = points. This is true of the entire CeroWrt build. Proposal: We should =93finish up the last bits=94 to make 3.10.24-8 (or a close = derivative) be a stable release. It has been working fine AFAIK for lots = and lots of us. It certainly has been as well tested as other branches. = I see the following: - Look through the release notes (very bottom of the page at the URL = above) and review the items that Dave was worried about for the = 3.10.24-8 release - Make a decision on Link Layer Adaptation choices, and implement it. - What else?=20 Best, Rich